Reviewing and learning from the Displaced Persons scheme
The Displaced Persons scheme demonstrated the practicability and the desirability of a large-scale immigration program. Its apparent success encouraged government to persist with the mass migration program and to continue to bring Europeans as assisted migrants. Indeed, because the displaced were able to be directed to the humblest of jobs in remote areas, they proved to be more productive than the otherwise preferred British migrants. In deciding to continue the mass migration program, government hoped that it would still be able to direct European migrants, like those from Italy and Germany, to places where labour was most needed.
in work contracts had varied throughout the Displaced Persons scheme, but government now insisted, where it could, that the new assisted migration agreements would contract migrants to commit to learning English.
It seemed that ‘migrant labour had come to the rescue of basic industries when it was difficult to recruit a local workforce.’ SMH.
Representatives of the migrants saw the need for other changes. Discussions at the Citizenship Convention in January 1953 drew on experience with British migrants and recent experience with the new waves of non-British assisted migrants. They took place not long after Italian migrants had remonstrated loudly at Bonegilla and in Sydney about the lack of jobs caused by the economic downturn. Held as it was at the end of the Displaced Persons Scheme the Convention reflected what some thought had been happening with the displaced.57
‘The benefits [of the scheme] for Displaced Persons included food and lodging, guaranteed employment and English language teaching. The memories of post-war refugees are very ambivalent, combining gratitude at rescue from Europe with resentment at exploitation by the Australian authorities. But the greatest resentments were often caused by public attitudes, including the expectation that New Australians would not speak foreign languages in public and would strive to appear identical to native Australians, which most found difficult’. James Jupp.55
There were to be changes. In the last months of the Displaced Persons scheme the proportion of ‘employables’ had decreased as that of dependants had risen. Australia hoped that with the end of the ‘humanitarian’ considerations, it could resume the introduction of young single men and women. It could now put some emphasis on gathering people with skills.56 At least one other change seemed necessary – to help overcome assimilation problems. The conditions specified
22
‘I shall use every endeavour to become proficient in the English language and shall attend regularly the night classes conducted for all migrants at the Commonwealth Government expense for the purpose of teaching them the English language.’ Clause from contract agreed to by Hendrikus de Kruiff, Netherlands 1952.
The Citizenship Convention saw the need to change migrant accommodation centres. It urged the Department of Immigration to appoint trained social workers at the centres; to increase efforts to bring the centres ‘into the life of the general community’; and to provide ‘the same standard of accommodation for European migrants as for British migrants … where practicable’.
The Convention was wary of the label ‘New Australian’ and asked that non-British children be simply called ‘Australian children’. It also suggested that all school children should be encouraged to study the cultural and historical background of European migrants.